Age cannot wither him
Shakespeare's Education and Career
Mohit Ul Alam
In respect of education William Shakespeare (1564-1616) has a similarity with our two major poets: Rabindranath Tagore and Kazi Nazrul Islam. As our two poets had not had much of a formal education (Nazrul passed the Entrance Examination, which is equivalent to today's S. S. C. Examination, and Tagore went to England to study law, but returned without a degree), so Shakespeare had not either. In fact, the few records that are available do not give any solid proof of how Shakespeare received education as a young boy.
Conjectures are that Shakespeare may have attended a 'petty school' to learn the alphabet and catechism (a popular Elizabethan learning pattern for children involving question and answer), and then he might have attended a grammar school known as King's New School. In this kind of school, mainly conducted by the church, students were made to work very hard. Boy students from age eight to fifteen attended the classes on an arduous routine, which started at 6:00 A. M. in summer and 7:00 A. M in winter, and continued up to 5:00 P. M., with few breaks and holidays. Quite a harsh discipline was maintained in the school, and flogging was a common punishment, which was executed on the students' buttocks. The principal of the school that Shakespeare attended was Thomas Jenkins, an Oxford graduate, with 25 pounds as salary per year and a rent-free house.
The primary school curriculum of Shakespeare's days was based on Latin and Greek literature. The study of Latin was compulsory in the syllabus, and in fact in higher classes speaking in English was forbidden, much in the same way as speaking in Bangla is not permitted in many English-medium schools in Bangladesh.
The most common grammar book for English children during Shakespeare's time was William Lily's Latin Grammar, Grammatica Latina. Learning Latin, however, was a hard task, though Shakespeare may have been one of the fast learners. By the age of twelve the English children would have mastered the elements of the Latin grammar. Roger Ascham (pronounced Askam), a great schoolteacher of the time, who also taught Elizabeth, had designed a lesson in which the English child would simultaneously use a Latin text and a translated version of it into English in order to identify the correct sentences. In the school Shakespeare might have learnt the sententiae (Latin word for a morally edifying sentence), and the moral tags. That is why his plays have such lines based on traditional proverbs: 'All the world's a stage', or 'We are such staff as dreams are made on', or in an extreme case, 'Frailty, thy name is woman'.
Shakespeare might have been a very absorbing reader. It is said of Keats that no other poet had read Shakespeare better than he had, and about Shakespeare it can be said that he had read literature and history rather well. His plays show that he might have found Aesop's Fables, Apuleius's Golden Ass and Ovid's Metamorphosis particularly interesting. Shakespeare, however, spares no opportunity in looking back on his school days with mock serenity. English grammar which has so far kept people of this subcontinent mesmerized for hundreds of years, and having a profound knowledge of which has been recognized as the measuring rod of being educated or not, had also bothered Shakespeare to no end. In The Merry Wives of Windsor, he makes Sir Hugh Evans, the Welshman ask William Page a question about the genitive case: 'What is your genitive case plural, William?' (4.2.52).
And the fact that he might have felt his time in school as drudgery, the way both Tagore and Nazrul did find it boring, is rather sarcastically stated in As You Like It, where Jaques in his famous 'All the world's a stage' (2.1.139ff) speech describes a schoolboy walking to school unwillingly: 'the whining schoolboy with his satchel / And shining morning face, creeping like snail / Unwillingly to school' (2.7.144-46).
Shakespeare may have left school in 1579, or at the latest, 1580.
Ben Jonson, the rival playwright, and a sustained critic of Shakespeare, complained in his prefatory poem to the Folio edition of 1623 that Shakespeare had “small Latin and less Greek.” This comment, which meant that Shakespeare knew very little Latin and almost had no knowledge of Greek, had kept Shakespeare scholars sleepless ever since. They have collected evidence to well refute Jonson. However, the comment is unfair. It is like saying Tagore did know very little English because he did not have a university degree. Jonson, who used to sign his name with his degree M. A. written after it, was jealous of Shakespeare, considered him a great rival, and left little to chance when it was to make a remark on his great contemporary.
On the other hand, a booklist of Shakespeare's reading may prove that he had read, if not in the original but in translation, authors like Cato (through Erasmus, a pioneer Dutch humanist before Shakespeare), Ovid (in Golding's translation), Plutarch (as translated by North, the major source for Shakespeare's Roman plays), Livy (in Holland's translation), and very prominently Montaigne as translated by Florio. The last mentioned is significant, because in Shakespeare's own copy of Florio's Montaigne is found on the margin of a page Shakespeare's own signature, 'Will'a very rare happening, for only eight signatures by him are found.
However, the intellectual milieu of the day was ripe enough to feed Shakespeare automatically with the word of wisdom, and like Tagore, Shakespeare was largely self-taught.
As a child, Shakespeare may have watched performances by the visiting companies to Stratford. In a parish record at Stratford it is mentioned that nineteen visiting playing companies toured the town between 1569, when Shakespeare's father John Shakespeare was the bailiff (equivalent to modern mayoral post) and 1587, when Shakespeare might have left Stratford. When a touring company visited Stratford or another town it would announce its arrival with drums and trumpets.
Some of the leading companies, which visited Stratford at the time, were the Queen's Men, that performed at the Guild Hall in Stratford in 1569, and the Worcester's Men in August. If Shakespeare was too young to enjoy them, he might have developed a taste for the drama when he watched the Liecester's Men perform in 1573 or Warwick's Men in 1575.
How Shakespeare became such a renowned writer has remained a mystery. What Shakespeare did, or how he lived in the years between his becoming the father of the twins in 1585, and his name being enviously mentioned by Robert Greene, a rival elderly playwright, in 1592, in a pamphlet titled, Groat's Worht of Wit bought with a Million of Repentance, is subject to great speculation.
Shakespeare probably first settled in the capital in 1590. He might have been progressing very fast as to catch the notice of Robert Greene, who in the aforesaid pamphlet, called Shakespeare 'an upstart crow, beautified with our feathers' (a plagiarist, that is, a false arrogant poet who imitated their poetry), and also worried about his fast growing popularity as is evident in this line: 'the only Shake-scene in a country'.
Ernest Honigmann, a Shakespeare biographer and critic, trying to explain away the “lost years” (1585-1592), suggests that Shakespeare might have spent this time as a country school teacher, because this fact was reported to John Aubrey by William Beeston who was 'the actor-son of Shakespeare's former theatrical colleague, Christopher Beeston.'
Shakespeare may also have felt poetic talent arousing in him at a very young age, and so to make a name as a poet he might have decided to travel to London, in the same manner as many young poets in Bangladesh come to Dhaka to establish themselves as poets. At the time, the theatre was the most thriving form of entertainment in the city of London. Many talented young men would seek work in the theatre as Shakespeare did, presumably, in 1587.
In explaining Shakespeare's lost years further, Honigmann suggests that he was involved with the Lord Starnge's Men. The story is like this: in Shakespeare's school, after his first teacher Thomas Jenkins had left, the teacher who replaced him was John Cottom, a man from the north, that is Lancashire. He recommended Shakespeare to his friend Alexander Hoghton to teach in his school as an assistant teacher. Under Hoghton and then Hesketh, the young Shakespeare developed his skill as a dramatist, and probably drew the attention of the greatest of all the Lancashire families, the Stanleys. The head of the family, Henry Stanley, Earl of Derby, and his heir, Ferdinando, Lord Starnge, were active patrons of the drama, and in 1585, having become the father of the twins Shakespeare joined Lord Strange's household 'as one of his company of players'. Honigmann also suggests that Shakespeare might have toured France with the team in 1585, which means he was absent from Stratford when the twins were born.
The popular playwrights in Shakespeare's time lived under patrons, who were the noblemen of the court. They gave shelter and lodging to the writers, and they often kept playing companies supplying them with liveries or uniform. Shakespeare's first patron, Lord Strange was one of the most flamboyant noblemen in Elizabeth's court, and his company was the finest in London between 1591 and 1593. Shakespeare's next patron was the Earl of Southampton (the young man of the sonnets), to whom Shakespeare had dedicated his two poems written during the plague years and published in quartos: Venus and Adonais (1593) and The Rape of Lucrece (1594).
Every genius is born, but he also becomes. Though the most gifted of his time, Shakespeare had to go through his own learning curve. As an actor and writer he must have driven himself hard, as a line from a sonnet proves: 'Weary with toil I haste me to my bed' (Sonnet 27). From his childhood, like every Elizabethan child, Shakespeare had a very good grounding in the elements of speech.
Briefly speaking, Shakespeare's development in the craftsmanship of writing dramatic poetry may be understood by observing his early plays, Henry VI, for example, where he is almost depending on Thomas Kyd's trite versification like 'o eyes, no eyes', and his mature style in the great tragedies where he comes out of rhetorical formalism and assumes a natural cadence as employed in soliloquies like 'To be or not to be', which is neither prose nor poetry, but a way of expressing the deepest feelings.
'If you tickle us, do we not laugh?'
Syed Badrul Ahsan
You cannot escape Shakespeare. It matters little that you may not have studied English literature. The fact that you may have gone through life along a route hugely removed from the Bard is no reason for you not to have come by him, or by part of his legacy. Shakespeare, as so many have been saying for centuries, is for all time. And that timelessness has of course to do with the wisdom he dispensed through his works, through his poetry. You watch Hamlet. Or you read him. The point here is that you do it and would like to do it a lot more times because you feel you have an affinity with the Prince of Denmark. And how does that happen to be? It comes through the universality of his indecisiveness. But indecision is again, in truth, symbolic of the reflective nature of man. To be, or not to be, is a question that comes to you over and over again. It holds you back from a demonstration of romantic ardour, to a point where you drive your lover to despair with that cruelty of a statement: 'Get thee to a nunnery!'
In Shakespeare, you seem to be looking into a mirror that casts your image back at you. Consider the centuries that have gone by. Consider the conspiracies, the little men who have down the ages made a mess of life and a mockery of nobility. 'Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look / Such men are dangerous'. Something of an eerie feeling courses down your spine as you relate these words to the predatory times you have known. Think here of Bangladesh, of Chile, of Pakistan. Cassius' descendants have been all over the place. And yet, when you observe Caesar, it is Olympian grandeur that passes in your vision. 'I am constant as the North star', says he. And that is not all. Danger, he believes to the core of his being, knows full well that Caesar is more dangerous than danger itself. That is arrogance, sure. But in the great, in the one reaching for the skies, arrogance sometimes adds to the charisma of the personality. But, of course, the arrogant soon come to quick confusion. 'The Ides of March are come', a cheerful Caesar tells the man who had warned him of the darkness hovering over the day. 'Aye, Caesar, but not gone', comes the answer. Moments later, the dictator is dead at the feet of Pompey's statue. Everything palls, everything pales, everything falls.
We identify with Shakespeare because he understands us. That the human mind is often distraught, that it often whizzes into folly is what he reminds us of. And such folly is what you spot in Nick Bottom, in the love a beautiful woman showers on an ass. Sit back and think of the many times when women of seductive appeal have fallen for men who did not deserve them; and you realise, in your burgeoning youth or your graying middle age, that love is but another name for preoccupations asinine. But is it really? Haven't some of us been drawn to women who would have nothing to do with us, indeed would not touch us with a barge pole because of their charms and their hubris? And yet haven't we tamed those women? Observe the wild Kate you once pursued, animal-like. She is now smitten with you. And such are the varied manifestations of human behaviour that Shakespeare brings forth. Men and women are fickle. Then again, there are those who refuse to yield to fate, until that dark moment comes when blood stains the murderous hand and not all the perfumes of Arabia can wash it off. In Lady Macbeth, it is apocalyptic beauty you stumble into. How many children did she have? You ask, but will not stay for an answer.
And so tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow creeps in this petty pace from day to day, even as the winds sketch arid wastelands all over your face, Lear-like. There are the impetuous decisions you make, followed by a renewal of wisdom that comes rather late in the day. Your cry --- 'Why should a rat, a horse, a dog have life and thou no breath at all?' --- may rock the gates of the heavens, but Cordelia will not return. Neither will Desdemona.
Shakespeare teaches. And he touches. He draws attention to our frailties, to the warts that embitter our souls. Do you not feel bits of Shylock in you as the winds buffet you all along the turbid sea? 'If you prick us, do we not bleed? / If you tickle us, do we not laugh? / And if you poison us, do we not die?'
Your Ketketi, she you love in starlight ardour, waits for you at the edge of twilight. Age cannot wither her. Nor custom stale her infinite variety.
Did Shakespeare hate women?
Dr. Binoy Barman
"THE Taming of the Shrew” is a frustrating reading from the feminist point of view. In the play, William Shakespeare explicitly demonstrated his despise for womenfolk, subordinating them to their male counterpart. He held that a woman is good so long as she is obedient to man. Otherwise, she is a shrew. In the play, as it appears, Shakespeare's only mission has been to establish the supremacy of men over women. So there is no reason for any reader, male or female, having a sense of gender equity, to enjoy it. Shakespeare may easily be accused of gender bias, engendered by misogyny and feudalism, whereby a man is a lord and women are servile to him. In his misogynic feudalism, a woman must be dutiful to her husband but not the other way round.
Why did Shakespeare create the character of Katherina Minola, who is short-tempered, foul-tongued and loud-voiced? She is not to be tamed by any male frown. She is so haughty. But ultimately she had to shun all her temper and be obliged to her dominating husband Petruchio. What technique did Shakespeare apply to tame a wild girl? It is sheer cruelty -- coercion. Petruchio kept her newly married wife without food for an elongated time and dangling in the temptation of good attire, while behaving crazily. It is akin to domestic violence. Just out of fear or for love of life, she gave in to his rage. It is not a decent way to make a woman domicile, whatsoever. She, who is blamed as 'Katherina the Shrew' in the beginning of the play, is praised as 'Katherina the Most Obedient' in the end.
With this transformation, Shakespeare planted a powerful slap on the cheek of women's freedom. A woman soul was not tamed but enslaved in fact.
That was the ulterior motive in the mind of the sixteenth century Elizabethan playwright, who materialized his patriarchal agenda through his craftily woven dramatic expressions. As some would say, The Taming of the Shrew was written by a man, performed by men, and viewed by predominantly male audience, to make fun of women's frailty, out of insanity. It is not merely fun in the form of a comedy. The comic aspect of the play is overshadowed by the seriousness of the topic. It deals with a serious theme -- man/woman relationship in society. Shakespeare trivialized the balance of the relationship. George Bernard Shaw rightly termed the play as 'altogether disgusting to modern sensibility'. According to him, the play is a vile insult to womanhood and manhood from the first word to the last. It is a harshly misogynistic celebration of patriarchy and female submission.
The final scene of The Taming of the Shrew is most horrible, in my assessment, whereby Katherina expresses total submission to her tyrannical husband. It brings tension in male/female relationship through apparent peace, destroying social order. There is no moral lesson in it; rather it presents a moral dilemma. The modern audience cannot approve of the Shakespearian position on woman's dignity. Harsh treatment is not any medicine for the politically defined aberrant behaviour of women. Katherina is thrust into love with Petruchio, to whom she is no more able to express her hatred. A lady who is initially rebellious is tormented psychologically so as to bring under the foot of a greedy gentleman. She is made a personal property of her husband. She loses her own mind and language and is, at last, transformed into a caged parrot that would utter the words taught by the machinery of male chauvinism. Notice how Katherina advises other ladies (and how demeaning it is!) in the last scene:
“Thy husband is thy Lord, thy life, thy keeper,
Thy head, thy soueraigne: One that cares for thee,
And for thy maintenance. Commits his body
To painfull labour, both by sea and land:
To watch the night in stormes, the day in cold,
Whil'st thou ly'st warme at home, secure and safe,
And craues no other tribute at thy hands,
But loue, faire lookes, and true obedience;
Too little payment for so great a debt.
Such dutie as the subiect owes the Prince,
Euen such a woman oweth to her husband:
And when she is froward, peeuish, sullen, sowre,
And not obedient to his honest will,
What is she but a foule contending Rebell,
And gracelesse Traitor to her louing Lord?
I am asham'd that women are so simple,
To offer warre, where they should kneele for peace:
Or seeke for rule, supremacie, and sway,
When they are bound to serue, loue, and obay.
Why are our bodies soft, and weake, and smooth,
Vnapt to toyle and trouble in the world,
But that our soft conditions, and our harts,
Should well agree with our externall parts?
Come, come, you froward and vnable wormes,
My minde hath bin as bigge as one of yours,
My heart as great, my reason haplie more,
To bandie word for word, and frowne for frowne;
But now I see our Launces are but strawes:
Our strength as weake, our weakenesse past compare,
That seeming to be most, which we indeed least are.
Then vale your stomackes, for it is no boote,
And place your hands below your husbands foote:
In token of which dutie, if he please,
My hand is readie, may it do him ease.”
Not only in The Taming of the Shrew, Shakespeare also took condescending view of women in other plays. In Macbeth and Hamlet, for example, he sketched some female characters with negative characteristics. He depicted Lady Macbeth as a vile woman, who persuaded her husband to kill King Duncan, and who was ultimately regarded as the 'fourth witch'. He made Gertrude, mother of prince Hamlet, an accomplice of Claudius, who killed King Hamlet and married her. Thus many of his female characters are mean and wicked, as opposed to good dominant male.
Shakespeare had little respect for women. His personal life is probably responsible for this. He took a disrespectful stance as he failed to earn any respect from the women he was associated with during the prime time of his life. In his youth he played love with two girls (Anne Wetly and Anne Hathaway) together; he was stuck between the hatred and/or love of them. He wanted to marry the former but he was forced to marry the latter. It has been a great embarrassment for him. During marriage, he was eighteen and his wife was eight years older than him. He had no easy relationship with his wife. He left her in village home when he went to London for building his career in theatre. He used to meet his wife once or twice a year. He expressed his uncanny relationship with his wife through his will, where he did not bequeath any part of his property (during his death Shakespeare was a wealthy man) to her. Even he did not miss the last opportunity to insult her mentioning in the will that she would get his 'second best bed' after his death. What a practical joke!
The Bard of Avon garnered the epithet of the National Poet of England, who ultimately became the most important writer of international admiration. He wrote about 38 plays and 154 sonnets. All those were super hits. They are still read curiously and with great enthusiasm. His plays have been translated in almost all the major languages of the world and staged to enviable popularity. His plays and poems are an essential part of any English literature syllabus. The crown of the emperor of theatrical world is indisputably for his head. His plays are ingenious, stuffed with excellent language and themes. He is said to have discovered human in their real nature. I should say that he discovered not the full human but half of it -- 'man', woman being neglected. He was a dramatist for men and not for women. He was a protagonist of male chauvinism.
What glory did Shakespeare want to attain with maltreatment to women? He only satisfied his vicarious pleasure of subjugating them. I doubt the socio-psychological structure of his time and prevalent political ideology would sufficiently justify it. As we have seen, the treatment to womon in The Taming of the Shrew was totally inhuman. He could not be better due to his characteristic mettle. However unbelievable it may sound, the greatest writer in the English language and the greatest dramatist of the world was a woman hater.
(The writer is Assistant Professor and Head, Department of English, Daffodil International University.)
Biography of William Shakespeare
Star Campus Desk
WILLIAM Shakespeare (baptised 26 April 1564; died 23 April 1616) was an English poet and playwright, widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world's pre-eminent dramatist.He is often called England's national poet and the "Bard of Avon". His surviving works, including some collaborations, consist of 38 plays, 154 sonnets, two long narrative poems, and several other poems. His plays have been translated into every major living language and are performed more often than those of any other playwright.
Shakespeare was born and raised in Stratford-upon-Avon. At the age of 18, he married Anne Hathaway, who bore him three children: Susanna, and twins Hamnet and Judith. Between 1585 and 1592, he began a successful career in London as an actor, writer, and part owner of a playing company called the Lord Chamberlain's Men, later known as the King's Men. He appears to have retired to Stratford around 1613, where he died three years later. Few records of Shakespeare's private life survive, and there has been considerable speculation about such matters as his physical appearance, sexuality, religious beliefs, and whether the works attributed to him were written by others.
Shakespeare produced most of his known work between 1589 and 1613. His early plays were mainly comedies and histories, genres he raised to the peak of sophistication and artistry by the end of the sixteenth century. He then wrote mainly tragedies until about 1608, including Hamlet, King Lear, and Macbeth, considered some of the finest works in the English language. In his last phase, he wrote tragicomedies, also known as romances, and collaborated with other playwrights.
Many of his plays were published in editions of varying quality and accuracy during his lifetime. In 1623, two of his former theatrical colleagues published the First Folio, a collected edition of his dramatic works that included all but two of the plays now recognised as Shakespeare's.
Shakespeare was a respected poet and playwright in his own days, but his reputation did not rise to its present height until the nineteenth century. The Romantics, in particular, acclaimed Shakespeare's genius, and the Victorians worshiped Shakespeare with a reverence that George Bernard Shaw called "bardolatry". In the twentieth century, his work was repeatedly adopted and rediscovered by new movements in scholarship and performance. His plays remain highly popular today and are constantly studied, performed and reinterpreted in diverse cultural and political contexts throughout the world.
William Shakespeare was the son of John Shakespeare, a successful glover and alderman originally from Snitterfield, and Mary Arden, the daughter of an affluent landowning farmer. He was born in Stratford-upon-Avon and baptised on 26 April 1564. His actual birthdate is unknown, but is traditionally observed on 23 April, St George's Day. This date, which can be traced back to an eighteenth-century scholar's mistake, has proved appealing because Shakespeare died on 23 April 1616. He was the third child of eight and the eldest surviving son.
Although no attendance records for the period survive, most biographers agree that Shakespeare may have been educated at the King's New School in Stratford, a free school chartered in 1553, about a quarter of a mile from his home. Grammar schools varied in quality during the Elizabethan era, but the curriculum was dictated by law throughout England, and the school would have provided an intensive education in Latin grammar and the classics.
Later years and death
Rowe was the first biographer to pass down the tradition that Shakespeare retired to Stratford some years before his death; but retirement from all work was uncommon at that time, and Shakespeare continued to visit London. In 1612 he was called as a witness in a court case concerning the marriage settlement of Mountjoy's daughter, Mary. In March 1613 he bought a gatehouse in the former Blackfriars priory; and from November 1614 he was in London for several weeks with his son-in-law, John Hall.
After 1606-1607, Shakespeare wrote fewer plays, and none are attributed to him after 1613. His last three plays were collaborations, probably with John Fletcher, who succeeded him as the house playwright for the King's Men.
Shakespeare died on 23 April 1616 and was survived by his wife and two daughters. Susanna had married a physician, John Hall, in 1607, and Judith had married Thomas Quiney, a vintner, two months before Shakespeare's death.
In his will, Shakespeare left the bulk of his large estate to his elder daughter Susanna. The terms instructed that she pass it down intact to "the first son of her body". The Quineys had three children, all of whom died without marrying. The Halls had one child, Elizabeth, who married twice but died without children in 1670, ending Shakespeare's direct line. Shakespeare's will scarcely mentions his wife, Anne, who was probably entitled to one third of his estate automatically. He did make a point, however, of leaving her "my second best bed", a bequest that has led to much speculation. Some scholars see the bequest as an insult to Anne, whereas others believe that the second-best bed would have been the matrimonial bed and therefore rich in significance.
Shakespeare was buried in the chancel of the Holy Trinity Church two days after his death. The stone slab covering his grave is inscribed with a curse against moving his bones.
(All spotlight photos have been taken from the Internet)
Quotations from Shakespeare's plays
Who is a man that is not angry?
--Timon of Athens
Come not between the dragon and his wrath.
Let grief Convert to anger; blunt not the heart, enrage it.
This tiger-footed rage.
There is no following her in this fierce vein.
--A Midsummer Night's Dream
I understand a fury in your words. But not the words.
When Envy breeds unkind division:
There comes the ruin, there begins confusion.
That monster envy, oft the wrack
Of earned praise.
Thou liest, malignant thing! Hast thou forgot
The foul witch Sycorax, who with age and envy
Was grown into a hoop? hast thou forgot her?
Thou grumblest and railest every hour on Achilles,
and thou art as full of envy at his greatness as
Cerberus is at Proserpine's beauty.
--Troilus and Cressida
This was the noblest Roman of them all:
All the conspirators save only he
Did that they did in envy of great Caesar;
He only, in a general honest thought
And common good to all, made one of them.
Antony and Cleopatra
Romeo and Juliet
Timon of Athens
Henry IV, Part I
Henry IV, Part II
Henry VI, Part I
Henry VI, Part II
Henry VI, Part III
All's Well That Ends Well
As You Like It
The Comedy of Errors
Love's Labours Lost
Measure for Measure
The Merry Wives of Windsor
The Merchant of Venice
A Midsummer Night's Dream
Much Ado About Nothing
Pericles, Prince of Tyre
The Taming of the Shrew
Troilus and Cressida
Two Gentlemen of Verona
The Winter's Tale
Copyright (R) thedailystar.net 2010